Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35
  1. #11
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    Carriers are already pushing back against that in a pretty big way, though. Speculation is that ESPN might have to rebrand ESPNU as the SECNetwork, with carriers not wanting to add another channel to pay for every month.
    I could live with a la carte conference sports channels. I wouldn't pay a dime to watch anyone other than the ACC, and I would definitely pay for the ACC channel as long as it was reasonably priced considering content. I believe HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, & TMC were never forced down consumer's throats. Price it in that manner & I'm a happy consumer. But if it's going to be 75% recycled crap...no thanks! Give me live (or tape delayed) coverage of ACC soccer, volleyball, ice hockey, wrestling, etc.!
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  2. #12
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    I could live with a la carte conference sports channels. I wouldn't pay a dime to watch anyone other than the ACC, and I would definitely pay for the ACC channel as long as it was reasonably priced considering content. I believe HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, & TMC were never forced down consumer's throats. Price it in that manner & I'm a happy consumer. But if it's going to be 75% recycled crap...no thanks! Give me live (or tape delayed) coverage of ACC soccer, volleyball, ice hockey, wrestling, etc.!
    i know i'm the minority, but i want 500 sports channels, 1 news channel, and 1 channel with random entertainment and educational crap mixed in. if i were god of media, i would ensure every live sporting event from the Division 1 collegiate level and up through the pro sports was televised live somewhere on TV. i'm including the top pro leagues in other sports from all over the world, too. i also think all high school sports should be aired live in local markets. no such thing as too much sports for me...but again, i know i'm the super-minority on that.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  3. #13
    Senior Member Culpeper Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Location
    Glen Allen, VA (far western Henrico County)
    Posts
    19,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Will Stewart View Post
    He apparently sees it as #2 Burger King to #1 McDonald's. Sees the ACC Network as a Burger King as well.
    Dammit. Now I'm just hungry.
    “Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism.” ― Hubert H. Humphrey

  4. #14
    Senior Member Mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 13, 2012
    Posts
    1,186

    The smart folks leading the ACC Schools

    After reading the observations from Stech and the AD at Duke, I realized a couple of things. First, ACC have some of the brightest leaders running their athletic depts, second, there is alot more going on that they have NOT annouced.

    ACC is about as tight lipped regarding business operations in the NATION. The many so called experts on the message boards have really no idea whats really going on, but if you got the team from Duke UNC and Clemson on the work group working hte network, you can expect we are getting the maximum revenue.

    My bet is ACC model is different than the SEC or BIG 10, I think the ESPN partnership with the ACC is MUCH more integrated than reported. I think it involves ESPN basically offloading a channel to be designated as the ACC Network AND its somehow integrated with the LONGHORN Network. What this does to college football, I see Big 10 going to Fox full time along with the Pac 10 and Big 12 (if it survives). ESPN/ABC gets SEC and the ACC and ND, and the rest. SEC still gets CBS and ND gets NBC for footbal. ACC/Longhorn Network is a combined channel and SEC gets their channel. Who gets squeezed... the small conferences (ie. AAC, CUSA, MAC, MW etc.) They not only receive less rights but more limited time on Major Sports venues or even playing on a tuesday, wed or friday nite.



    Quote Originally Posted by DMaroonHokie View Post
    It would be nice for all the reasons and motivations for the ACCN be put on a message board for all to see, but that won't happen. The evidence for this, as Stech said, is all 15 university presidents (very smart people) signed a GOR. They know something we don't. You don't need to see the dynamite go off, just hear the boom.

  5. #15
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    IMO, there is so such very good to elite ACC Men's basketball inventory, that good games would flow down to an ACCNetwork.
    Maybe not UNC DUke, but SYR/GT, LV/UVA, ND Duke could easily end up on the ACCN, as ESPN doesn't have enough schedule capacity on the primary networks for all the games that can draw bball fans. This is how the SYR/PITT/ND/LV expansion will provide value.


    Quote Originally Posted by Late 80s Hokie View Post
    I think this very much depends on the public appetite, at a lower price perhaps, for "Olympic" sports. An argument can DEFINITELY be made that the ACC has the absolute BEST inventory of sports other than Football and Mens Basketball. That's the sort of stuff that could drive a network, but perhaps at a lower revenue point than the B1G currently gets.

    And, how much does ESPN get from internet providers for ESPN3? Maybe they'd get more from cable providers if they put that content on an ACC Network? Then there would be some football and mens basketball, and then the content WOULD be comparable to or better than the B10 Network.
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    February 21, 2013
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    easy: another channel to force down cable operator's throats for more carriage revenue and more ad revenue. ESPN currently has the rights to a lot of un-aired inventory from their various partners, and if they can find a profitable way to get that inventory on the air, they would LOVE to do it!
    Its true that live sports content is a perishable commodity. If it doesn't air, it spoils. But allowing some of the product to spoil might be a strategic necessity , at times. Airing more games on another channel diverts some viewers from ESPN's primary channels. Fewer viewers means lower ad rates. If ESPN can hand-off an ACC game to a local or regional affiliate, and get value for it, I'm sure they'll do it, since they don't have to produce the program or sell the ads. But they own most ACC content so they control what is released to competing outlets. They withhold content the same way and for the same reason that DeBeers withholds diamonds from the market: to reinforce the value of the product. The SEC will learn soon enough that ESPN will not allow the ESPN/SECN to detract from ESPN proper. Try to envision the ESPN/ACC network: ESPN owns the content, ESPN produces the programming, ESPN sells the advertising. What is the role of the conference? Delivering Olympic sports? Nothing wrong with those sports until you try to monetize them. What does the ACC bring to the party that would warrant a share of the proceeds?
    I don't know the nuts & bolts of this business, but from just a practical view, I can't see how this would work. I continue to believe that Raycom represents the only path to a conference channel. Not sexy, I know...

  7. #17
    Of course, some folks hear a boom, think it's dynamite, but it's only a fire cracker.

    Quote Originally Posted by DMaroonHokie View Post
    It would be nice for all the reasons and motivations for the ACCN be put on a message board for all to see, but that won't happen. The evidence for this, as Stech said, is all 15 university presidents (very smart people) signed a GOR. They know something we don't. You don't need to see the dynamite go off, just hear the boom.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845
    ESPN is so dominate in sports with so many channels that they have established themselves as the King Maker in Sports. It has been proven when they get a sport, things improve and when they don't have a sport...things level off or go down. They are able to promote a sport or conference like no other channel group...almost around the clock and with multiple venues.

    Ask yourself does ESPN have an exclusive agreement with the SEC, the PAC, the B1G, the Big 12-2? Nope there is only one conference where all the TV money runs through the King Maker. So who do you think that ESPN is going to hype in the long run?

    In fact many of us would agree that there has already been a positive change in the way that ESPN has treated the ACC in the last year.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mercury View Post
    After reading the observations from Stech and the AD at Duke, I realized a couple of things. First, ACC have some of the brightest leaders running their athletic depts, second, there is alot more going on that they have NOT annouced.

    ACC is about as tight lipped regarding business operations in the NATION. The many so called experts on the message boards have really no idea whats really going on, but if you got the team from Duke UNC and Clemson on the work group working hte network, you can expect we are getting the maximum revenue.

    My bet is ACC model is different than the SEC or BIG 10, I think the ESPN partnership with the ACC is MUCH more integrated than reported. I think it involves ESPN basically offloading a channel to be designated as the ACC Network AND its somehow integrated with the LONGHORN Network. What this does to college football, I see Big 10 going to Fox full time along with the Pac 10 and Big 12 (if it survives). ESPN/ABC gets SEC and the ACC and ND, and the rest. SEC still gets CBS and ND gets NBC for footbal. ACC/Longhorn Network is a combined channel and SEC gets their channel. Who gets squeezed... the small conferences (ie. AAC, CUSA, MAC, MW etc.) They not only receive less rights but more limited time on Major Sports venues or even playing on a tuesday, wed or friday nite.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    September 26, 2005
    Posts
    354

    What is the impact of the B1G contract negotiations on the ACCN?

    I can't help but think that part of the delay with the ACCN is that ESPN is waiting to see what happens with the upcoming B1G TV contract negotiations.

    If ESPN loses the B1G to Fox, that will open up tons of programming slots for ACC content on the "main" networks of ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU. Would there even be any need for an ESPN-owned ACCN?

    OTOH, say ESPN is able to retain the B1G's rights, and has to spend a lot of money in doing so. It might be willing to sell back some of the ACC rights to the conference and/or Raycom for a potential channel.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    November 23, 1999
    Posts
    2,390
    This bit is interesting, too: “But at the same time, there’s a whole bunch of us that would love it (NYC hosting the ACC tournament), I don’t know how it all plays out, but I would like the ACC to have a very strong relationship with New York City. I’d be much less than honest if I didn’t say that. That’s the biggest media market in the world, great opportunity, and every one of our schools does LOTS of business up there, and I use that in the broadest context. … It’s right in the midst of our footprint, so to do something up there with some level of frequency is important."

    We need to move the BB tournament to NYC asap, at least every other year.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •